This type of perp is high on my list, too. The woven into the fabric of the community type of guy. The one nobody would in a million years suspect. The "he was such a nice guy" type of perp.

Click to expand...

Yes and I think he and Mollie knew each other and I also think thats kind of what LE has been saying since the beginning. Once they got those cell phone and fitbit records they had a pretty good idea. Now I think they are trying to find Mollie and gather enough good evidence on whomever harmed her. Fingers crossed.

That may have simply been the easiest place to put them. I don’t support that theory though. I firmly believe that the dogs were in her basement because that’s where Mollie put them when she left the house. With everything else we know, it’s likely the dogs were out there when she left for her jog, and she never had the opportunity to let them back out.

Click to expand...

Assuming they were loose on the main floor of the house, why not just leave them there? I can't see some dirtbag saying "Okay, you're coming with me, but first I want you to put those dogs in the basement so they don't doo-doo on the carpet."

I'm not buying that she was taken from the home for the simple matter that her phone was gone. Why would you take someone from their house...and not make them leave their phone at said location. Yeah I can see the Fitbit staying on her arm...but a perp would know to not let the phone leave the house unless she had it hidden. Not everyone knows what a fitbit is but they know a phone when they see one.

New memeber here. I’ve been sleuthing for years, but had no idea it was a thing until I stumbled upon Websleuths a few weeks ago. You guys bring a level of comfort and I appreciate it.

Just saw that VP Mike Pence posted a video on twitter and commented on MT. Interesting? If you go to his twitter page you will see.

I hope I am allowed to say that. I know you can’t report things from social media so I certainly don’t want to violate any TOS.

I also believe that if LE has a POI with any kind of footprint such as a possible car on surveillance, wouldn’t they plead to the public to help find the person of said car? I just don’t believe they have any valuable leads from collecting footage and/or receipts without needing the public’s help in identifying. It seems as if LE typically releases that info to the public, for example, ATM footage, vehicle footage, even footage of the POI themselves. IMO

Click to expand...

They may not be releasing that information for a reason. It is a way to verify whether people's responses are accurate, perhaps. If they said to look for a red car of a certain make/model they would have hundreds of people calling. But if they ask people if they saw ANY vehicles in a certain area, and a dozen people describe a particular car, it would be easier to pinpoint. Then of course there is the concept of not wanting to reveal anything that may help the perp.

I fail to see how LE can determine the perp is likely known to Mollie, via pings, which seems to be the most part of their evidence, if any. If they had isolated a person known to her whose pings lined up with hers during crucial timeframe...he would be “in the docks” so to speak, explaining himself like WC. Especially if he had been interviewed and claimed to be elsewhere...which should cover everyone known to her who has been interviewed, as if they said they WERE with her, well there he is.

Most people are harmed by someone known to them...far more than by serial killers or passing strangers, so it is a logical assumption that she knew him. But they cannot know this until they have their perp. And they don’t or we would be seeing WC-like activities or an APB for his location.
Jmo

WC became known via police scrutiny in this particular case...making him fall into the parameters of “sleuthable” I think. So far, no one else has. Jmo

Click to expand...

He's not mentioned in the first page anymore, and I find it almost impossible to think that he could have done this and not been charged with all the police activity and publicity around him. I think he is innocent and we should leave him alone unless something concrete comes out.

Assuming they were loose on the main floor of the house, why not just leave them there? I can't see some dirtbag saying "Okay, you're coming with me, but first I want you to put those dogs in the basement so they don't doo-doo on the carpet."

Click to expand...

True. And if they were on the first floor of the house to begin with, they might very well have engaged the suspect during the initial encounter. There would likely be some sort of evidence of this.
I suppose it’s still possible that the perp came in when he dogs were out, they were excited, and the perp wanted them out of the way so he could remove Mollie from the house without them engaging or following. I don’t think this is likely though.

I'm not buying that she was taken from the home for the simple matter that her phone was gone. Why would you take someone from their house...and not make them leave their phone at said location. Yeah I can see the Fitbit staying on her arm...but a perp would know to not let the phone leave the house unless she had it hidden. Not everyone knows what a fitbit is but they know a phone when they see one.

Click to expand...

That fact, combined with everything else (dogs in basement, jogging clothes likely on, wallet left behind etc.) means that you are likely correct.

Most people are harmed by someone known to them...far more than by serial killers or passing strangers, so it is a logical assumption that she knew him. But they cannot know this until they have their perp. And they don’t or we would be seeing WC-like activities or an APB for his location.
Jmo

Click to expand...

People keep saying "it's usually someone close to them" except in this case it doesn't seem to be true because the people closest to MT have been cleared.

Assuming they were loose on the main floor of the house, why not just leave them there? I can't see some dirtbag saying "Okay, you're coming with me, but first I want you to put those dogs in the basement so they don't doo-doo on the carpet."

Click to expand...

Could have been somebody that knew the dogs and owners routine. A set up.

People keep saying "it's usually someone close to them" except in this case it doesn't seem to be true because the people closest to MT have been cleared.

Click to expand...

Very true. But the door is wide open to someone on the periphery of Mollie’s life, being involved. An acquaintance, former classmate, neighbor, or someone else who fits into the category of “known” but not close.

But how would the perp know the dogs were supposed to be in the basement when nobody was home?

Click to expand...

He may have said " put the dogs away, or "get rid of those dogs", " do something about those dogs." He does not necessarily have to know that they are kept in the basement. Then of course if it was someone known to her, he may have known to tell her "where" to put them. When threatened with a gun or other weapon, people generally do as their told. Although Mollie is a fighter, even the bravest are compliant with a gun pointed to their head.

People keep saying "it's usually someone close to them" except in this case it doesn't seem to be true because the people closest to MT have been cleared.

Click to expand...

Nope. Only three cleared. Mollie's boyfriend and her two brothers. That's it. That question was asked early on at one of the press conferences and LE answered it. Since then the reporters have messed up which brothers since there two sets of brothers. It's been pretty messed up since then. But then when is there good, reliable reporting anymore?

I fail to see how LE can determine the perp is likely known to Mollie, via pings, which seems to be the most part of their evidence, if any. If they had isolated a person known to her whose pings lined up with hers during crucial timeframe...he would be “in the docks” so to speak, explaining himself like WC. Especially if he had been interviewed and claimed to be elsewhere...which should cover everyone known to her who has been interviewed, as if they said they WERE with her, well there he is.

Most people are harmed by someone known to them...far more than by serial killers or passing strangers, so it is a logical assumption that she knew him. But they cannot know this until they have their perp. And they don’t or we would be seeing WC-like activities or an APB for his location.
Jmo

Click to expand...

I think they can have a very good idea who the perp might be based on her social media and text message interactions.

I'm not buying that she was taken from the home for the simple matter that her phone was gone. Why would you take someone from their house...and not make them leave their phone at said location. Yeah I can see the Fitbit staying on her arm...but a perp would know to not let the phone leave the house unless she had it hidden. Not everyone knows what a fitbit is but they know a phone when they see one.

Click to expand...

I don't believe MT was abducted from DJ's house but for in a case as to why would a perp NOT want to leave behind a victim's phone is if it contains messaging between the perp and the victim.

I think they can have a very good idea who the perp might be based on her social media and text message interactions.

Click to expand...

I do too and I never before felt that way. I do now. They know.

I decided to add that in the beginning I was very frustrated that they were not telling us anything. I truly thought it was going to be another swoop in and swoop right out.
But darn with maps and searches I am starting to think cell phone and fitbit info might be tracking this guy/gal/guys and they just might be successful.

I fail to see how LE can determine the perp is likely known to Mollie, via pings, which seems to be the most part of their evidence, if any. If they had isolated a person known to her whose pings lined up with hers during crucial timeframe...he would be “in the docks” so to speak, explaining himself like WC. Especially if he had been interviewed and claimed to be elsewhere...which should cover everyone known to her who has been interviewed, as if they said they WERE with her, well there he is.

Most people are harmed by someone known to them...far more than by serial killers or passing strangers, so it is a logical assumption that she knew him. But they cannot know this until they have their perp. And they don’t or we would be seeing WC-like activities or an APB for his location.
Jmo

Click to expand...

It's possible that they're holding off in the hope that she's still alive and that he will eventually lead her to them; or, conversely, out of fear that if they bring him in he'll clam up and she'll starve to death. And if that's the case, much of what they've been doing - the multiple WC interviews, etc. - may be part of a ruse to make the dude comfortable that he's getting away with it.

Very true. But the door is wide open to someone on the periphery of Mollie’s life, being involved. An acquaintance, former classmate, neighbor, or someone else who fits into the category of “known” but not close.

Click to expand...

The door is not wide open for us. And in a town of 1400, Molly probably knew everyone.

On this specific site or what?
Public record is public record. If the press can announce to the world that WC has been charged with stalking numerous times, then certainly I can say that nothing of record came back about some unidentified individuals.

Click to expand...

I would ask a mod just to be safe. I was referring to posting information in general about anything you discover doing a back ground check. Not just that nothing was found. It is the information that IS found that could be a problem. I don't know how reliable or detailed those online criminal background checks are.